Restoring sash windows/building regs

[Melz]

Does anyone have any advice for me about restoring my windows? My house is in England, not Listed, not in a conservation area, just an attractive Edwardian semi on a main road. My adjoining neighbours have their original sash windows, whilst we have ugly 1980s UPVC double glazed casement windows. My plan to reinstate single glazed sash windows seems to fall foul of the Bulding Regs Part L, but the double glazed sash windows we have found which do comply, seem to be very thick and needing wide glazing bars, which spoils the "period" appearance.

I can't decide whether to stick with the ugly UPVC, or spend a lot of money on windows which would be better looking but still obviously modern. Anyone else had the same dilemma?

 

[Moo]

When my son's Edwardian terrace plastic windows reached the end of their life (ie unrepairable), I just went ahead and got the local carpenters to make sashes identical to the originals that graced the neighbours' houses.
Not knowing anything about Part P, or X, or Y, or Z, I just went for the single-glazed version which looks wonderful.
So far, there haven't been any visits or letters from angry officials.

 

[Melz]

It is kind of tempting to do that, and I've got a lovely carpenter/joiner who could do the work, but we've got around thirty windows and the thought of there being ANY risk we might have to rip them out and re-do them, or find we've got problems if we need to sell the house is stopping me being quite so anarchic!

 

[Nemesis]

It's a real dilemma I agree - the DG with thick glazing bars is NOT attractive, DG has a limited lifespan, there's also the environmental probs of disposal of the uPVC to consider, too.

 

[Gervase]

It's a tricky one.
To quote from the relevant docs: "Failure to obtain Building Regulations approval can result in prosecution and fines of up to £5000. The Council can also have the building work removed or rectified."
However, would the council have the foggiest clue as to the current state of your windows?
And, to be honest, most local authorities are so strapped for cash and manpower these days that the only prosecutions likely to be brought are for work that is actually potentially injurious to human life.
You have to ask yourself what your local authority is like - is it the sort that would have the money and the inclination to pursue you?
The answer would probably be'no'. But it is your call, and I don't envy you.
I operate in a grey area outside the ken of building control for much of my working life. I wish I didn't have to, but sometimes it's necessary because the client wants a particular sort of work. I explain all the possible problems and leave it up to the client. Usually the client says 'Go for it'. So far, there have been no major problems, but we have been in a position where a bare-faced lie had to be told to avoid problems under the new Part L, and I wasn't entirely happy with that.
In short, I'd say tht if you want to do it, do it, and don't tell anyone (including neighbours and would-be buyers - to them the windows 'have always been like that'). Just present the work as a fait accompli.

 

[Nemesis]

I doubt anyhow they would simply prosecute without giving you the chance to rectify what you had done...

I'd start small and see what happens...

 

[Lime]

In short, I'd say tht if you want to do it, do it, and don't tell anyone (including neighbours and would-be buyers - to them the windows 'have always been like that'). Just present the work as a fait accompli.

Exactly!
As the regulations get more and more intrusive the more the householder will lie.
Who can prove (or bother to prove) otherwise?
It is in their best interests to do so.
Tell the truth and you could be in for a very expensive and unhappy time.

 

[Melz]

Thanks Nemesis, Gervase.

It really goes against the grain for me to take such a risk and worse still - I'm embarrassed to tell you this- I have been having chats with the people in Building Control about what we want to do (cringe !!!!!). That, combined with the fact that we are on a main road and a white van parked here can be easily seen by any passing planning department bod, deters me from just going ahead.

My inclination is to try to take on the interpretation of the Regs. Do you think there's a way of doing that?

Oh, and what's the problem with disposal of the UPVC? Couldn't it be recycled?

 

[biffvernon]

The motivation for Part-L is quite sound (a contribution towards the survival of humankind on this planet) even if it's application in certain situations if plain daft.

In your situation, Meltz, I'd suggest that you search for a design of timber window that looks good and stops you wasting energy. It will mean compromise but some solutions are much better than others. Think in terms of design which looks good, if 21st century, rather than faking an Edwardian 'restoration'. Most very old buildings are not all of one time-piece and I can't see any harm in allowing a building to develop over time so long as valuable historic fabric is not lost. We don't (yet) regard 1980s uPVC as a historic fabric. Hence I would suggest you investigate new windows that are both kind to the environment and enhance the appearance of the house. Obeying the Law is a bonus.

 

[Nemesis]

The problem is, I've not seen anything look as good as sash windows with original mouldings - to my eye, anything else always looks clumsy.

The greenest solution would of course be to now leave what's there, I'm not too convinced recycling is the answer (and I would like to see more proof of the process, and that it's not just hype) but I agree aesthetically uPVC is a disaster, makes everywhere look tacky.

As far as saving the planet is concerned - in period buildings with small windows, and reasonably well draughtproofed ones at that with curtains shut at night, maybe even decent secondary glazing, I think it's a sledgehammer and nut situation.

Taking on the regulations - that would be interesting...

http://www.gov.je/PlanningEnvironment/Planning/Historic+Buildings/Policies+For+Replacing+Windows+and+External+Doors/

 

[thiambal]

The problem you will have if you defy the building regs is what happens when you come to sell. If you cannot provide the relevant paperwork it is going to delay things, cause sales to fall through or worse still, give you buyers an excuse to knock the cost of 30 new windows off the purchase price.

Heartbreaking not to be able to do what you want, and with the polusion from air travel set to make up 70% of all carbon emmisions and most of the rest coming from cars, industry and cows - single glazed windows are going to make bugger all difference to the planet. But I am inclined to agree with Biff - go for something sympathetic that meets the regs.

 

[Melz]

Thanks for your replies everyone. I'm thinking about several options:

1.Try to challenge the building regs, maybe with help from an architect or someone who really knows them inside out. There used to be a case for offsetting thermal loss through windows by adding extra insulation to the roof space, for example and I don't know if this is still allowed. I can't rely on the planning department turning a blind eye as I want to make alterations to the front garden wall and gateposts which I know will need permission. We might also be able to argue that we're not replacing the windows, but repairing them as part of the wooden surround is still present as are the boxes, cords and weights.

2. Investigate the U values obtainable from single-glazed sash windows with secondary glazing.

3. Look into double-glazed sash windows with a period-style slightly irregular glass in the front pane.

 

[Nemesis]

If part of the sash boxes are there then that is your answer I think...

 

[wobs]

Oh, and what's the problem with disposal of the UPVC? Couldn't it be recycled?

I know of only two plants in the UK that does this currently. One on Oldham and one in Peterlee

Although the European PVC industry says it aims to recycle up to 75% of old uPVC products by 2010, although it is not clear exactly where the recycled PVC would go. Some claim it will go back into long term use products such a building materials.

 

[thiambal]

We were told that there must be at least 20% of the original window remaining to constitute repair rather than replacement - and we could not count the weight in that.

If you speak nicely to building control they may let you get away with secondary double glazing - but it is expensive

 

[Nemesis]

I'd ask to see the regulations stipulating that...

 

[thiambal]

Fair point, we were only told this over the phone and like most things - ask a different person, get a different answer!

 

[Nemesis]

I wonder too what constitutes that percentage?

They have no idea what was there before probably...

 

[Melz]

thiambal,

I'm intrigued about the 20% argument. I've never heard that before. I wonder if there's a definition of repair versus replacement somewhere in the regs?

 

[Nemesis]

It may be worth contacting SPAB and asking...